Drudge Flashing Siren Is Up: DNC Sues Trump, Wikileaks, And Russia Over Loss Of 2016 Election

[radical right]

And, the supposed trespass occurred in DC, not NY, it appears the DNC did a bit of judge shopping in a district other than where the alleged injury occurred.


.

The case is of conspiracy with a foreign entity. And that happened in Trump tower.

 

[OKTexas]

They didn't steal any emails, you dumbass dingbat, and there is zero evidence that the Trump campaign participated in any conspiricy with the Russians. None. Zilch. Nada. Zip.

Trump hired Stone who talked to Gucifer 2.0 who worked for the GRU who hacked the server.
Giuliani and Stone announced the release two days prior.

Is that actually alleged in the filing or are you making shit up again?


.

 

[OKTexas]

You're making assumptions and why didn't post the actual rule which reads:

Rule 26(3)(b)(2)(B)

(B) Specific Limitations on Electronically Stored Information. A party need not provide discovery of electronically stored information from sources that the party identifies as not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. On motion to compel discovery or for a protective order, the party from whom discovery is sought must show that the information is not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. If that showing is made, the court may nonetheless order discovery from such sources if the requesting party shows good cause, considering the limitations of Rule 26(b)(2)(C). The court may specify conditions for the discovery.

Rule 26. Duty to Disclose; General Provisions Governing Discovery


So now you're just making shit up.


.

Go back a few posts and you'll find I posted the whole paragraph. If you read it, it says the process plays out by:
the party from whom discovery is sought must show that the information is not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost.

If that showing is made, the court may nonetheless order discovery from such sources if the requesting party shows good cause,

The russians the the GRU has "good cause" the RNC does not. They can get the discovery from the other party.

You're still making assumptions, good cause is determined by the judge, not you.


.

 

[radical right]

You're still making assumptions, good cause is determined by the judge, not you.


.

Simply put everybody says they want to see the server, the DNC says that's a heavy burden. So the judge looks to see which one had "good cause" and grants them discovery.

Discovery is shared, so there is no harm in limiting the burden. A party should not have to grant each individual defendant or plaintiff the same thing over and over again..

 

[OKTexas]

And, the supposed trespass occurred in DC, not NY, it appears the DNC did a bit of judge shopping in a district other than where the alleged injury occurred.


.

The case is of conspiracy with a foreign entity. And that happened in Trump tower.

Did it, the house committee says otherwise, the DOJ says otherwise, in fact everyone who has seen all the evidence, so far, says no American willingly or wittingly participated with Russians.

Face it this is a publicity stunt the DNC is pulling to keep this shit in the news for the upcoming midterms. The cool thing is it will most likely blow up in their face.


.

 

[radical right]

Did it, the house committee says otherwise, the DOJ says otherwise, in fact everyone who has seen all the evidence, so far, says no American willingly or wittingly participated with Russians.

.

That's a lie, the federal court judge who convicted the american named in the Mueller indictment against the 13 russians says an american participated with the russians.

If you're going to just outright lie, you might check the federal court records first.

 

[radical right]

Working With the Seven-Hour Time Limit for Depositions in Federal Court | Trial Practice | ABA Section of Litigation

Background
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure generally limit depositions to seven hours.

Indeed, the Advisory Committee Notes recommends that courts consider the need for each parties’ attorney to depose a witness, subject to the admonition that aligned parties should designate one attorney to depose the witness on topics of common interest

 

[Manonthestreet]

 

[OKTexas]

You're still making assumptions, good cause is determined by the judge, not you.


.

Simply put everybody says they want to see the server, the DNC says that's a heavy burden. So the judge looks to see which one had "good cause" and grants them discovery.

Discovery is shared, so there is no harm in limiting the burden. A party should not have to grant each individual defendant or plaintiff the same thing over and over again..

LMAO, do you seriously think the Russians will even bother to hire representation? They're sipping vodka and laughing their asses of on how the DNC is carrying their water.


.

 

[OKTexas]

Did it, the house committee says otherwise, the DOJ says otherwise, in fact everyone who has seen all the evidence, so far, says no American willingly or wittingly participated with Russians.

.

That's a lie, the federal court judge who convicted the american named in the Mueller indictment against the 13 russians says an american participated with the russians.

If you're going to just outright lie, you might check the federal court records first.

You might want to review Rosenstein's announcement of the indictments, he clearly said no Americans wittingly participated.

He said that there's no allegation that any American was knowingly involved in the conspiracy. Nor is there an allegation that the efforts of the defendants affected the outcome of the election.

Rod Rosenstein announced indictments of Russians in U.S. election meddling

Just that one statement blows the crap out of the DNCs case.


.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

It will be hilarious when the DNC has to turn over everything they have on their computers to Trump's campaign lawyers during 'discovery'.
Dear GOD the DEMs are so ******* stupid it's stunning to watch.
Maybe the DNC will take a sledgehammer to the computers, like Hillary did.

You hve no clue how discovery owrks do you? It's limited to matters germane to the charges in the case. And unless the contents of the server are exculpatory to the conspiracy, it's non discoverable.

So what is the argument that the server will prove they didn't conspire with the russians?

LOL

Moron...

They want damages for the server hack, that they can not show happened. Every single thing those idiots want from the Republicans can be sought for from the dim wits.. The discovery door swings both ways dumb ass..

They’re not asking for damages for the server hack, per se. They’re asking for damages for the conspiracy between the Russians and the Trump campaign, to undermine the Clinton campaign. And for publishing the emails they stole from the server. The negative publicity surrounding the publication of the emails reduced donations as people were afraid their personal information would fall into nefarious hands.

The reduced donations are easy to prove. Money received before the hack. Money received after. That’s can be proven without access to the server.

They’re asking for damages for the conspiracy between the Russians and the Trump campaign

What conspiracy?

And for publishing the emails they stole from the server. The negative publicity surrounding the publication of the emails reduced donations as people were afraid their personal information would fall into nefarious hands.

Podesta fell for a phishing email. Sue him.

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

Breaking News Update!

A couple of semi-literate Democrats have already figured out this suit opens up EVERYTHING to discovery.



Dem Rep Speier: DNC Lawsuit 'Ill-Conceived,' 'I'm Not Very Supportive of It'
Dem Rep Speier: DNC Lawsuit 'Ill-Conceived,' 'I'm Not Very Supportive of It' | Breitbart

 

[Dragonlady]

Just because you don’t believe that the Trump campaign conspired with the Russians, despite nearly one hundred criminal charges, and five guilty pleas which say they did, doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.

Phishing is illegal. Laws are designed protect the stupid and the naive from criminals. Law suits are one method to help make those who have been hurt financially by criminal acts, whole again.

 

[Care4all]

Hide and watch, genius! Patience is a virtue!

Considering the score is currently:
Billy_Bob 19
Care4all 0

I have plenty of patience... You guys not so much..

I've been here 11 years, I ain't going anywhere, and will respectfully eat cake, take a whipping, if I am wrong about all of this....

Sort of like when you were wrong with your predictions about the Trayvon Martin case and the 'Big Mike' case?
You're ALWAYS on the losing side dear. You ought to ask yourself why that is.
How about reposting all your 'predictions' about Trump when he announced he was running for the Presidency?

I still do not think Zimmerman should have killed Trayvon, Trayvon did not deserve to die.

And the same with big Mike, he didn't deserve to die....

Neither should have been killed for their deeds, and I stand by that....

And from the moment Trump came down that golden escalator and gave his first official speech, and all the things he said and did afterwards, he was NOT FIT to serve us in the oval office.... regardless of who his opponents were in the primary or the election, or what things he proposed that I liked.

but the one thing that I could never accept, is if he aided and abetted the Russian govt in the interference they caused in our election process. It's cheating....and cheaters should never be held high and rewarded, as winners.

Zimmerman should not have killed Trayvon? What choice did the teenage thug give him? When you physically assault someone, then you have signed your own death warrant if that person is armed. The same goes for Michael Brown.

What you don't seem to get is that the people they attacked didn't deserve to die. When it has to choose, the law is on the side of law abiding citizens, not thugs.

Good riddance. They needed killing.

trayvon thought zimmerman was stalking him and going to harm him and his little brother who was at home alone, waiting for Trayvon to return. Zimmerman, predetermined that trayvon was a thug for no reason at all....other than his skin color and a hoodie, and presumed he didn't belong in the neighborhood....ALL OF THAT imagined in his own warped head, and this is why he was afraid, and instead of throwing a punch or two and getting his face hit or taking the pain of a big boy's fight, he wimped out and used his gun, to kill him...

Michael Brown did not have a gun, did not have the means to kill the cop...

BOTH of these men were unarmed and did NOT deserve to be killed for their actions...

Both men that killed these young men were cowards and scared of their own shadows....

It may have been legal, because the grown men were scaredy cats.... but that still does not negate that Brown and Trayvon did not deserve their killing....

it was a tragedy all around...imo.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Just because you don’t believe that the Trump campaign conspired with the Russians, despite nearly one hundred criminal charges, and five guilty pleas which say they did, doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.

Phishing is illegal. Laws are designed protect the stupid and the naive from criminals. Law suits are one method to help make those who have been hurt financially by criminal acts, whole again.

Just because you don’t believe that the Trump campaign conspired with the Russians, despite nearly one hundred criminal charges,

100 criminal charges against Trump campaign employees for "conspiring with the Russians"?

I must have missed that. You have a link?

Phishing is illegal. Laws are designed protect the stupid and the naive from criminals.

I agree, the criminals who fooled that stupid Podesta should be punished.
Unless it was Trump, what does it have to do with the drunken, corrupt, defeated Hillary?

 

[OKTexas]

Considering the score is currently:
Billy_Bob 19
Care4all 0

I have plenty of patience... You guys not so much..

I've been here 11 years, I ain't going anywhere, and will respectfully eat cake, take a whipping, if I am wrong about all of this....

Sort of like when you were wrong with your predictions about the Trayvon Martin case and the 'Big Mike' case?
You're ALWAYS on the losing side dear. You ought to ask yourself why that is.
How about reposting all your 'predictions' about Trump when he announced he was running for the Presidency?

I still do not think Zimmerman should have killed Trayvon, Trayvon did not deserve to die.

And the same with big Mike, he didn't deserve to die....

Neither should have been killed for their deeds, and I stand by that....

And from the moment Trump came down that golden escalator and gave his first official speech, and all the things he said and did afterwards, he was NOT FIT to serve us in the oval office.... regardless of who his opponents were in the primary or the election, or what things he proposed that I liked.

but the one thing that I could never accept, is if he aided and abetted the Russian govt in the interference they caused in our election process. It's cheating....and cheaters should never be held high and rewarded, as winners.

Zimmerman should not have killed Trayvon? What choice did the teenage thug give him? When you physically assault someone, then you have signed your own death warrant if that person is armed. The same goes for Michael Brown.

What you don't seem to get is that the people they attacked didn't deserve to die. When it has to choose, the law is on the side of law abiding citizens, not thugs.

Good riddance. They needed killing.

trayvon thought zimmerman was stalking him and going to harm him and his little brother who was at home alone, waiting for Trayvon to return. Zimmerman, predetermined that trayvon was a thug for no reason at all....other than his skin color and a hoodie, and presumed he didn't belong in the neighborhood....ALL OF THAT imagined in his own warped head, and this is why he was afraid, and instead of throwing a punch or two and getting his face hit or taking the pain of a big boy's fight, he wimped out and used his gun, to kill him...

Michael Brown did not have a gun, did not have the means to kill the cop...

BOTH of these men were unarmed and did NOT deserve to be killed for their actions...

Both men that killed these young men were cowards and scared of their own shadows....

It may have been legal, because the grown men were scaredy cats.... but that still does not negate that Brown and Trayvon did not deserve their killing....

it was a tragedy all around...imo.

You're a freaking idiot, both caused their own deaths, your rancid assumptions are ridiculous, you were not there. Also this has nothing to do with the topic of the thread.


.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Considering the score is currently:
Billy_Bob 19
Care4all 0

I have plenty of patience... You guys not so much..

I've been here 11 years, I ain't going anywhere, and will respectfully eat cake, take a whipping, if I am wrong about all of this....

Sort of like when you were wrong with your predictions about the Trayvon Martin case and the 'Big Mike' case?
You're ALWAYS on the losing side dear. You ought to ask yourself why that is.
How about reposting all your 'predictions' about Trump when he announced he was running for the Presidency?

I still do not think Zimmerman should have killed Trayvon, Trayvon did not deserve to die.

And the same with big Mike, he didn't deserve to die....

Neither should have been killed for their deeds, and I stand by that....

And from the moment Trump came down that golden escalator and gave his first official speech, and all the things he said and did afterwards, he was NOT FIT to serve us in the oval office.... regardless of who his opponents were in the primary or the election, or what things he proposed that I liked.

but the one thing that I could never accept, is if he aided and abetted the Russian govt in the interference they caused in our election process. It's cheating....and cheaters should never be held high and rewarded, as winners.

Zimmerman should not have killed Trayvon? What choice did the teenage thug give him? When you physically assault someone, then you have signed your own death warrant if that person is armed. The same goes for Michael Brown.

What you don't seem to get is that the people they attacked didn't deserve to die. When it has to choose, the law is on the side of law abiding citizens, not thugs.

Good riddance. They needed killing.

trayvon thought zimmerman was stalking him and going to harm him and his little brother who was at home alone, waiting for Trayvon to return. Zimmerman, predetermined that trayvon was a thug for no reason at all....other than his skin color and a hoodie, and presumed he didn't belong in the neighborhood....ALL OF THAT imagined in his own warped head, and this is why he was afraid, and instead of throwing a punch or two and getting his face hit or taking the pain of a big boy's fight, he wimped out and used his gun, to kill him...

Michael Brown did not have a gun, did not have the means to kill the cop...

BOTH of these men were unarmed and did NOT deserve to be killed for their actions...

Both men that killed these young men were cowards and scared of their own shadows....

It may have been legal, because the grown men were scaredy cats.... but that still does not negate that Brown and Trayvon did not deserve their killing....

it was a tragedy all around...imo.

Trayvon thought zimmerman was stalking him and going to harm him

If that was true, he should have used his cell phone to call 911, instead of telling his girlfriend he was gonna beat up the creepy cracker.

Michael Brown did not have a gun, did not have the means to kill the cop...

The 6 foot 4 inch tall thug who had just assaulted a store clerk, while stealing cigars,
tried to grab the cops gun.
What do you mean he had no means?

Both men that killed these young men were cowards and scared of their own shadows....​

Or scared of the thugs that had already attacked them.​

 

[radical right]

Did it, the house committee says otherwise, the DOJ says otherwise, in fact everyone who has seen all the evidence, so far, says no American willingly or wittingly participated with Russians.

.

That's a lie, the federal court judge who convicted the american named in the Mueller indictment against the 13 russians says an american participated with the russians.

If you're going to just outright lie, you might check the federal court records first.

You might want to review Rosenstein's announcement of the indictments, he clearly said no Americans wittingly participated.

He said that there's no allegation that any American was knowingly involved in the conspiracy. Nor is there an allegation that the efforts of the defendants affected the outcome of the election.

Rod Rosenstein announced indictments of Russians in U.S. election meddling

Just that one statement blows the crap out of the DNCs case.


.

You changed your statement from

no American willingly or wittingly participated with Russians.

TO:

any American was knowingly involved in the conspiracy.

You went from participated with russians, to conspired to meddle in the election..

You're nothing but a lying hack. Grow up, stop lying, stop changing your claims.

 

[OKTexas]

Did it, the house committee says otherwise, the DOJ says otherwise, in fact everyone who has seen all the evidence, so far, says no American willingly or wittingly participated with Russians.

.

That's a lie, the federal court judge who convicted the american named in the Mueller indictment against the 13 russians says an american participated with the russians.

If you're going to just outright lie, you might check the federal court records first.

You might want to review Rosenstein's announcement of the indictments, he clearly said no Americans wittingly participated.

He said that there's no allegation that any American was knowingly involved in the conspiracy. Nor is there an allegation that the efforts of the defendants affected the outcome of the election.

Rod Rosenstein announced indictments of Russians in U.S. election meddling

Just that one statement blows the crap out of the DNCs case.


.

You changed your statement from

no American willingly or wittingly participated with Russians.

TO:

any American was knowingly involved in the conspiracy.

You went from participated with russians, to conspired to meddle in the election..

You're nothing but a lying hack. Grow up, stop lying, stop changing your claims.

Hey dipstick, do you know what synonyms are? Look it up.
Also I guess you're incapable of seeing difference in my words and those in the CBS article. Rosenstein used both unwitting and knowingly in his press conference. You can watch it here.

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein Announces Indictment Russian Nationals

So take holier than thou attitude and shove it.


.

 

[radical right]

Hey dipstick, do you know what synonyms are? Look it up.
Also I guess you're incapable of seeing difference in my words and those in the CBS article. Rosenstein used both unwitting and knowingly in his press conference. You can watch it here.

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein Announces Indictment Russian Nationals

So take holier than thou attitude and shove it.


.

I know what synonyms are, Like OKTexas and Lying asshole.

You claimed no americans worked with the russians, which was disproved by the indictment, and to prove it, you posted that no americans were charged in the russian meddling conspiracy, which is an entirely different matter.

no American willingly or wittingly participated with Russians.

TO:

any American was knowingly involved in the conspiracy.